Law Commons^™

Introduction: Trends And Developments With Respect To That Amendment 'Central To Enjoyment Of Other Guarantees Of The Bill Of Rights', Yale Kamisar

Articles

Seventy years ago, in the famous Weeks case,' the Supreme Court evoked a storm of controversy by promulgating the federal exclusionary rule. When, a half-century later, in the landmark Mapp case,2 the Court extended the Weeks rule to state criminal proceedings, at least one experienced observer assumed that the controversy "today finds its end." 3 But as we all know now, Mapp only intensified the controversy. Indeed, in recent years spirited debates over proposals to modify the exclusionary rule or to scrap it entirely have filled the air - and the law reviews.'

From Swift To Erie: An Historical Perspective, Gene R. Shreve

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Harmony & Dissonance: The Swift & Erie Cases in American Federalism by Tony Freyer

Does Doctrine Matter?, Frederick Schauer

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Burger Court: The Counter-Revolution That Wasn't by Vincent Blasi

Is The Burger Court Really Like The Warren Court?, Paul Bender

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Burger Court: The Counter-Revolution That Wasn't by Vincent Blasi

Toward Increased Judicial Activism: The Political Role Of The Supreme Court, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Toward Increased Judicial Activism: The Political Role of the Supreme Court by Arthur Selwyn Miller

Brandeis, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Brandeis by Lewis J. Paper

Director, Office Of Workers' Compensation Programs V. Perini North River Associates: Judicial Dilution Of The Longshoremen's And Harbor Workers' Compensation Act's 'Status' Requirement, Roberto L. Corrada

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

In Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Perini North River Associates, the Supreme Court effectively deleted from the LHWCA the section 2(3) "status" requirement as it pertains to workers injured on actual navigable waters of the United States. The Court's generous view of the 1972 amendments will clearly result in more workers being able to recover benefits under the Act. At the same time, however, the Court's means of expanding the Act without relying on clear congressional intent disturbs traditional notions of judicial review and implies an attempt at judicial legislation.

Although the Court noted that it intended to …

Mueller V. Allen: A Fairer Approach To The Establishment Clause, Michael S. Ariens

Faculty Articles

The decision upheld by the United States Supreme Court in Mueller v. Allen helds a new dawn in establishment clause jurisprudence. This five-to-four decision, written for the majority by Justice Rehnquist, upheld a Minnesota statute permitting taxpayers to deduct the tuition, textbook, transportation, and instructional material expenses of their children when calculating their state tax liability. By this decision, the Court has cleared the way for an accommodation between church and state that more equitably recognizes the principles and values that the religion clauses were intended to protect.

Following a review of the history of the establishment clause, tuition tax …

Federalism And Supreme Court Review Of Expansive State Court Decisions: A Response To Unfortunate Impressions, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

This article addresses the Burger Supreme Court’s approach to federalism and concludes that the Court seems to be reordering federal-state judicial relations. This reordering appears to be occurring at the expense of both state autonomy and individual liberties, especially the rights of state criminal defendants.

Although there certainly have been cases which suggest the Burger Court has a lopsided federalism, upon thorough analysis of these cases, this determination is shown to be incorrect. In fact, the present Court greatly respects state autonomy and the independence of state courts. Further, the Supremacy Clause requires the Court to serve as final arbiter …

On Complaining About The Burger Court, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

How Useful Is Judicial Review In Free Speech Cases?, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

Do Government Rights Prevail, Or Are Shoshone Indians Trespassers In Their Own Country?, Richard B. Collins

Publications

No abstract provided.

New Jersey V. T.L.O.: The Supreme Court’S Lesson On School Searches, Gerald S. Reamey

Faculty Articles

Considerable disagreement persists as to the fourth amendment rights of students within schools. Particularly, this disagreement regards the extent to which fourth amendment rights possessed by students may frustrate reasonable attempts by educators to maintain the order necessary to preserve an educational environment.

In New Jersey v. T.L.O., the Supreme Court considered an argument advanced by the State of New Jersey that the “pervasive supervision” of school children diminishes the legitimate expectation of privacy a child may have in property “unnecessarily” brought to school. The Court concluded that the necessity of maintaining security and order in the educational environment was …

The Bildisco Case And The Congressional Response, James J. White

Articles

Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Reform Act authorizes one in bankruptcy to "assume or reject any executory contract ...of the debtor." The most frequent use of the section arises when a lessee goes into Chapter 11 and decides either to reject its real estate lease with its lessor or, if the lease is at a favorable rental rate, to assume it and assign it to another. A less frequent but more controversial use of section 365 is to reject one's collective bargaining agreement with his employees.

Legal Barriers To Worker Participation In Management Decision Making, Theodore J. St. Antoine

Articles

Collective bargaining lies at the heart of the union-management relationship. It is the end and purpose of the whole effort to protect employees against reprisals when they form an organization to represent them in dealing with their employers. Collective bargaining is grounded in the belief that industrial strife will be checked, and the workers' lot bettered, if workers are given an effective voice in determining the conditions of their employment. My thesis is that federal law, even while placing the force of government behind collective bargaining, has so artificially confined its scope that the process has been seriously impeded from …

Gates, 'Probable Cause', 'Good Faith', And Beyond, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Illinois v. Gates1 was the most eagerly awaited constitutional-criminal procedure case of the 1982 Term. I think it fair to say, however, that it was awaited a good deal more eagerly by law enforcement officials and the Americans for Effective Law Enforcement than by defense lawyers and the American Civil Liberties Union. As it turned out, of course, the Gates Court, to the disappointment of many, did not reach the question whether the exclusionary rule in search and seizure cases should be modified so as not to require the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of the fourth amendment when …

Hearings On Jury Bias Or Misconduct, Ronald J. Bacigal

Law Faculty Publications

In the recent cases of Smith v. Phillips, and Rushen v. Spain, the United States Supreme Court recognized that judicial review of ex parte contacts with a sitting jury may raise a number of separate but interrelated constitutional rights: (1) the right to an impartial jury; (2) the right to a due process post-trial hearing on jury bias; (3) a possible due process right to a mid-trial hearing on jury bias; (4) the defendant's right to be present at such mid· trial hearings; and (5) the right to be represented at such mid-trial hearings. As Justice Stevens noted in his …

Discrimination Bans Demonstrate Approaching Maturity Of Employment Law, Theodore J. St. Antoine

Articles

The pervasive message of this symposium sponsored by the Labor Relations Law Section, whether or not intended by the individual authors, is that American employment law is moving beyond adolescence and may be approaching maturity.

A New Look At An Old Association: Will Today's Women Be Tomorrow's Jaycees?, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Who Is Injured When Racially Discriminatory Private Schools Are Tax-Exempt?, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

What Standards Apply When Freedoms Collide?, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Legislative Formality, Administrative Rationality, Harold H. Bruff

Publications

No abstract provided.

Diminished Luster In Escambia County?, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Your Money Or Your Wife's?: Social Security Changes Considered, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Are Residential Quotas Constitutional?, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The 1965 Voting Rights Act: Some Wrongs Still Not Righted, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Miranda: The Case, The Man, And The Players, Yale Kamisar

Reviews

On the eve of America's bicentennial, the American Bar Association told its members of a plan to publish a book about the "milestone events" in 200 years of American legal history, and invited them to vote on the milestones to be included. When the balloting was over, Miranda v. Arizona1 - "the high-water mark" of the Warren Court's revolution in American criminal procedure2 - had received the fourth highest number of votes.3 I venture to say that if members of the general public had been asked to list the "most regrettable" or "most unfortunate" milestones in American legal history, Miranda …

Dissenting Opinions By Supreme Court Justices In Federal Income Tax Controversies, Walter J. Blum

Michigan Law Review

What is to be learned from this review of the various analyses offered in dissenting tax opinions over the past five terms of the Supreme Court? When the Court has decisively interpreted narrow or technical language in the statute, dissenters all too often indulge in lengthy analyses that can only serve to create further confusion. Only when the Court focuses on a judicially made rule or an issue with constitutional implications is a broader dissent appropriate. If dissenters generally adhered to the guidelines set forth at the outset of this Article the tax world would, I believe, be at least …

An Essay On The Conceptual Foundations Of The Tax Benefit Rule, Patricia D. White

Michigan Law Review

My aim in this essay is to explore the foundations of the tax benefit notion. My strategy is simple, but it is probably best to state it explicitly at the outset. I begin with a straightforward and uncontroversial example of the application of the "inclusionary aspect" of the tax benefit rule. Using it as a paradigm, I try to discern why the law deems it appropriate to increase a taxpayer's taxable income. Next I examine the account of the tax benefit rule given by the Supreme Court in Hillsboro to see if it is consistent with the paradigm. I conclude …

The Supreme Court's Misconstruction Of A Procedural Statute--A Critique Of The Court's Decision In Badaracco, Douglas A. Kahn

Michigan Law Review

Before addressing the lessons to be derived from Badaracco, it is necessary to make good on the author's claim that it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of a reasonably skeptical reader that the Court's decision was patently wrong and resulted from a poor technique of statutory construction. This is a heavy burden, especially since the decision was reached by an overwhelming majority of the Court and since two courts of appeals and at least one student law review note reached the same result. The reader must judge whether the author succeeds in satisfying it. This Article will first …